#Gamergate Escalates

By Frogboy on September 21, 2014 3:36:40 PM from

JoeUser Forums

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+1478

Lately, when thinking about #Gamergate I am reminded of the intro to Total Annihilation:

Warning: this is long…

Part 1: The participants

What started as a relatively minor dispute regarding whether the gaming media was choosing who and what to cover based on pull rather than merit has become a massive, cross industry conflict that shows no sign of decreasing. Two sides: #GamerGate and its opponents (anti-#GamerGate?).

Each sides has their points (I’ll try to represent each side as best I can, comment if you think I’ve been unfair to either side).

The #GamerGate Points include:

They think the gaming media is corrupt. Specifically, they think that gaming journalism is a clique that chooses what to cover and how to spin it based on their shared politics and relationships.
They think the big publishers buy positive coverage outright and that the little indies sleep/schmooze their way to positive coverage.
They are outraged at having their criticism misrepresented as misogyny
They strongly object to having their movement characterized based on the misbehavior of a tiny group of trolls and jerks.
They are angry that attempts to discuss the topic get blocked, censored, deleted, etc.
They are outraged at what they see as collusion in the gaming media openly attacking gamers as a bunch of “nerds” “gamers are dead” “basement dwellers”, etc.
They have evidence demonstrating double standards in how the gaming media treats different issues based on their politics
They believe that the gaming media has become infested by “Social Justice Warriors” who are using their platforms to jam their politics down the throats of people who just want to read about video games.

The opponents of #gamergate points include:

Any legitimate points the #gamergate movement might have had are far outweighed by the harassment and threats against outspoken women in the industry that is done in the name of #gamergate
They (gaming media) are outraged at being called corrupt
They (gaming media) are upset at the suggestion that the gaming media has some sort of organized conspiracy
They (general) believe gamers are inherently insular and want to shout down any attempts at reforming it.
They (general) believe gamers are entitled and thin-skinned, unable to show empathy or accept even mild criticism of their hobby.
They (gaming media) are angry that their entire profession is being mischaracterized based on poor choices made by a few
They (general) are very skeptical of new #gamergate claims because of the misrepresentations made during early claims
They believe that the “sane” people who support #gamergate are being used/tricked by the vile, misogynist core that is at the heart of #gamergate

And of course, you have fringe forces on both sides: The trolls and toxic scum that use #gamergate as a shield to attack people and the misandrists, social justice warriors (SJWs) who have their own hateful agenda.

Part 2: The Escalation

Roping more and more people in

I’m not going to do a moral equivalence here. In my mind, the balance of wrongdoing is heavily weighted on the opponents of #gamergate. Mainly, because its opponents have had a long head start of character assassination and harassment. I know some of my friends in the media will be appalled by that but that’s mainly because they haven’t seen the shit storm directed at anyone who dares not support the “social justice” narrative for the past few years.

Without the August 28th mass “gamers are dead” article series on multiple sites, none of this would have happened. Let’s remember that. It was a tempest in a teapot before that.

Every major escalation I’ve seen in this industry conflict has begun with one side mass misrepresenting others with a very broad brush.

The anti #gamergate people are the ones who brought me in

One thing to make clear here: The pro-#gamergate people didn’t ask me to stand up for them. They made no demands on me. All I did was, as game developer, was tweet that I like gamers and don’t like seeing gamers misrepresented. For that, the anti-#gamergate people started smearing me. (SJW logic: Make up allegations, use allegations as evidence, repeat).

In other words, I was not/am not trying to use #gamergate to get a pound of flesh. You want me to quit throwing in the misdeeds of the SJW crowd in SJW faces? Then tell them to quit character assassinating me. Because, let’s face it, I have a large, heavy, blunt instrument in the form of having been falsely accused of sexual harassment and having won that case so thoroughly that the plaintiff had to publicly apologize. You don’t get more clear cut than that in the legal world. I’d be delighted to just talk about games, tech, etc. But if you’re going to suggest I’m some sort of misogynist or rapist or sexual harasser then yea, I’m going to use the 800 pound mace that SJWs carelessly crafted for me.

And for those truly concerned in the gaming media: If you want to do “the right thing” (even if it’s two years late): Feel free to have the articles and threads that smear me set to just not be indexed by search engines. Is that really asking for a lot? No censorship. No retractions. No apologies. Just make it so that new harassers aren’t born every time someone looks at the first page of Google results on us. I’ve been doing stuff 20 years, I’ve helped invent a number of the technologies you guys use on your PCs every day. But it’s all crowded out because the media chose to use me as a cartoon villain to push forward an agenda. Thanks for that. I just love having to discuss the Kotaku article every few weeks with some investment banker or enterprise customer. I really enjoy having to answer awkward questions by extended family. And the occasional random “You fucking shit lord, I hope you die in a fire!” emails I get are just..well they’re just so heart warming. Thank you for that.

The double standards

When I see a Ben Kuchera arguing for the deletion of threads because they might encourage harassment of game developers, I ask, where was he when I was taking a beating on nearly every gaming forum for something I didn’t even do? Oh that’s right, he was helping spread it! Yea, thanks for using an image that shows a claim that I asked my female employees if they enjoyed tasting semen. And you know what? I didn’t hold any of this against anyone. I didn’t send PR people to demand threads removed. No DMCA messages. But it’s pretty infuriating to see calls to censor discussion based on “harassment” when they had no problem when I was the target.

Except, of course, in my case, I hadn’t actually done any of the things I was alleged to have done. No, I’ve gotten to fry for the past couple years in countless threads across the net. I also want to point out that even though we won, and we got a public apology, some don’t consider that enough because apparently we were supposed to demand the plaintiff admit in writing to committing perjury. So even mercy is frowned upon by these people.

Part 3: Both sides are recklessly escalating it

Like I said, I’m not going to go with the moral equivalence. One side has definitely, in my estimation, been worse overall. But the #gamergate side is creating its own impassioned, long-term detractors as well through its excessively broad brushing:

The PRO #gamergate are roping people in too

Just as the anti-Gamergate people have managed to bring a lot of people against them, it’s escalating the other way around too.

Let me make a few points clear about the gaming media:

There is no general gaming media “conspiracy”. There are thousands of journalists in the gaming media and they wouldn’t be able to agree what shade of blue the sky is. When you attack gaming journalists with a broad brush, you are alienating these guys just like when the anti-gamer articles roped in so many thousands of gamers.
The average gaming journalist has immense integrity. They would quit before taking a bribe or writing something intentionally biased.
Many of the major game sites really do have strongly enforced policies to ensure fairness in games.
Most gaming journalists are extremely tolerant of other points of view. I will happily disclose that I am pretty good friends with many journalists who have the opposite views on many topics and yet we’re still friends and it has never negatively affected coverage.
Despite being friends with journalists, it has never affected coverage of our games. I remember when Elemental bombed. I felt bad because it must have sucked for the reviewers to pan our game but they did because they have integrity. We’re professionals. It’s my job to make games. It’s their job to write about them. It really isn’t that hard to separate friendships when doing your job.
It is important to understand the rather unique structure of game “journalism”. You can’t lump it all together like you could, say, business journalism or political journalism because of the origins of the gaming press as we know it today sprung from the Internet itself. It would take a whole article to explain this. The TL;DR version is this: It is hard to tell where game blogs stop and game journalists start. There is no clear line.

Part 4: It’s going to get worse

Next up: All hell is going to break loose

There’s no way around it, the people who crapped on gamers and #gamergate are in for a rough couple weeks.

Let me preface this: NO ONE can survive detailed scrutiny. This is doubly true if the person doing the scrutiny is not giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Historically, the activist columnists in other industries have gotten away with trashing their opponents. It’s easy to lampoon the Tea Party people, for instance because their core base aren’t very technical and have no real means to strike back. Same was true of the Occupy movement which got overrun by SJWs and was easily dismissed soon after.

But gamers are technical. They do have the means to fight back. I’m sure it never occurred to the columnists who wrote “gamers are dead” that their targets would be able to effectively return the favor. Those who have had great success cherry picking and editing quotes/emails/tweets to create a false narrative of their opponents never dreamed that doing so would come back to haunt them.

Part 5: GamerGate: What is it you want? Define it soon or it will get defined for you

I won’t claim to be straddling the fence. But as someone who does feel that the gaming media is being unfairly tarnished with the broad strokes, I have to say: Don’t let your movement end up like the French Revolution where everyone is eating each other.

I recommend that the #gamergate movement come up with say a 5 point consensus on what their goals are. I don’t know what those 5 points should be but if they don’t craft a message soon, this escalation will soon carry far beyond what even its most reasonable supporters would be comfortable with.

The TL;DR version:

The gaming community is experiencing a schism that has manifested itself around the #gamergate twitter tag. Each side has escalated it by demonizing the other escalating it to uglier and uglier extremes. The #gamergate side of things should create a consensus on a ~5 point list of specific things they are looking to achieve before it escalates completely out of control.

P.s. You’re welcome to discuss this issue on our forum. Hopefully it won’t get DDOS’d…

Update #1: I've come to the conclusion that the 5 objectives should not be constructed in the form of a demand. Rather, consider up to 5 constructive, tangible things you want out of this. In case someone asks what the difference is, a demand can be a Specific type of objective but objectives don't necessarily involve another party's cooperation to be achieved.

I just realized I've not logged onto my stardock account for 3 years, took me a while to figure out my account/password.

On topic, This shit reminds me mostly of the entire Atheism+ thing when SJW tried to insert their 'insanity' into Atheism.
People fell for it for a while till they realized the SJW types were more interested in talking about perceived oppression, sexism, progressive stacking (what is this even) and patriarchy then religion and non-religion, believing and non-believing.

I believe the entire thing escalated when the SJW types attacked Dawkins for perceived sexism (which obviously ended up not being true) and most normal people realizing 'oh em gee these people are out of their minds'
Just like now tough most people in Atheism were again a bit more technically minded and more sceptical about things, caught on to it and basically ejected the SJW types.

I think the biggest thing in all of this is that it's hard to argue or justify being against something called 'social justice', but the term is so vaguely defined and so broadly used that something that appears to be left of the political spectrum can also be used all the way far right, but that's not the main topic really.

I'm not going to write a 5 point list, mostly because I'm not eloquent enough nor have enough experience to write those things.
I do however know somethings that should be on it.

Journalists should stop letting friendships and their or their own political agenda's decide what to write and what not to write, what to recommend and what not to recommend. While it's nice to know what your perspective is we want products rated and recommended on their own merrits, not on how your friends liked it or how it fits your believes and political ideology.
Journalists should disclose ties, be they Professional or Casual, Sexual or monetary in nature when you review something or recommend something, even when you casually discuss something, these things colour your opinions and we as readers have the right to know.
Journalists should better research the topics they discuss, to often are conclusions drawn on wild claims with little to no evidence, to often are entire communities condemned because it's easier then doing some research.
Journalists should also more often and more openly apologize for mistakes they make, currently to often do they ignore them or shrug without going back to older articles to update them, to many careers and reputations are damaged or destroyed simply because of this and the previous point.

Edit: most of the beef #GamerGate has is with the Clique of journalists that recently condemned Gamers as dead and are part of that mailing list anyway, plenty of normal, ethical and sane reporters out there working for other websites.
Also anything connected to Silver string Media, fuck those people /personal opinion

Successfully updated karma reason!

Lots of good twitter discussion and other responses regarding what should those 5 points be and can such a "decentralized" group every agree on anything.

Well, I would say, yea. Because I think as movements go, the #gamergate one is reasonably agreed upon what they're unhappy about. They may quibble on wording.

The way I would imagine this occurring is something roughly in this order:

People debate lots of different points and get it down to say a half dozen
Then someone sets up a survey on say Survey Monkey with the different points (even similar ones with different wording)
People are sent to the survey monkey survey to vote on those points
The top answers are then subjected to the survey process again to widdle it down
When five points are reached, people can set up sites like on say (www.gamergatepoints.org) or whatever.

And what should these points be?

IMO:

They should NOT be vague. No pap. No feel good crud. If your point can't be measured, verified, etc. it's not really a point.
It should be reasonable, realistic. Not some lofty feel good point.
It should generally be things NOT. I.e. Focus on sins of COMMISSION not OMISSION.

Here's 5 points off the top of my head:

A sample proposal on what specific objectives many GamerGate proponents are looking for achieve:

Transparency on any financial or intimate relationships between journalists and the subject you're reporting on.
Ensuring that what games and developers get covered is based on merit and not on undisclosed personal or political views the writer has on the subject
Keep editorial content and news separate. Don't allow editorial narrative or political agendas to seep into what is supposed to be objective reporting.
Discourage the blocking or censoring of topics based on your personal or political views of the subject.
Vigorously discourage individual writers from using their position as a platform to push a personal agenda unrelated and counter to the understood mission of the gaming site.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I also think it would be healthy if, in the mid-to-long-run that the gaming community that IS concerned about this sort of thing have a place where issues are moderated, considered, policed, and discussed.

A place where cooler heads can prevail but also a place where people can coordinate the policing of the 5 agreed on principles. This would be to help discourage the kind of smearing we saw on August 28. See http://www.littletinyfrogs.com/article/457616/Gamergate_and_the_RPS_response for more details on that.

Successfully updated karma reason!

What do you think of the following

1.
All prior personal involvement or relationships with review subjects should be noted and disclaimed, personal relationships and living arangments, services like patreon/kickstarter should be noted when reviewing material

2.
You are professionals your name is part of your job, actions on social media should be held accountable, attacks and slander taint your professional image and that of the company you work for.

3.
Blogs about people should have more than one source, articles about the personal lives of those in the industry need to be convered by more than one party with at least two sources or people interviewed

4.
Politics or personal opinions should not sway the coverage of videogames or what videogames are chosen for coverage if you have personal views on a subject make an editorial section and voice your personal views on that

5.
No more political pandering, no longer write reviews that lack nuance or use heavy handed wording to propagate a personal political agenda at the sacrifice of context, gameplay, mechanics or facts about a game

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think what GamerGate needs is a positive set of goals, not a negative set of goals. We can't change what private sites do and don't allow. I had a pretty long list of the detailed wants, as I understand them. But they boil down to five or fewer issues. Really, the gamer community wants to build something better, so it's on us to do that instead of trying to fix a broken establishment.

1. Any website claiming to be reporting news or employing journalists should have a statement of professional ethics available. Gamers can decide for themselves if the statement of professional ethics makes it a trustworthy source of news instead of a collection of ad-paid bloggers. Individual cases of perceived journalistic misconduct can be discussed in the framework of the stated professional ethics.

2. GamerGate should, over time, build up and promote blogs/news sites that promote gaming news from an objective standpoint -- or to the degree that subjectivity is necessary or desired, from a fair standpoint where no particular viewpoint gets undue promotion or focus. The need for objectivity raises as the controversy of an issue does.

3. The gamer community should raise concerns over nepotism, cronyism, corruption, etc. and share relevant info with the community. At the same time, the community should ensure that it be made clear that circumstantial evidence is only circumstantial, allegations are only allegations, etc. Fair-minded individuals/bloggers/journalists will cover the issues and report on them, and only fact-checked, substantiated reports should be acted upon.

4. The gamer community should make itself available to developers, journalists, etc. to discuss concerns in both directions. Such discussions should be as free from value judgements as possible. Wether or not a concern is valid or reasonable does not change the fact that it needs to be addressed, especially as more and more people express this concern.

if some site wants to hire a gender ideologue who writes clickbait articles and deletes criticism in the comments, there's nothing we can do to stop that. We can, however, support our own sites that do follow rigorous ethics, report the news instead of making it, report the news in a fair way, and provide an outlet for civil discussion. This ensures the toxicity present for so long will have a way to dissipate. The weakness of the gamer community was that it was disjointed and separated. Now we are organized. Following the above points, when controversy erupts our voices will still be heard.

Successfully updated karma reason!

[screwed up reply to above comment]

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm just amused by all this, that and occasionally shocked by the surprise of others...

Since I stopped reading reviews pretty much entirely over a decade back, I don't actually care what they do. If they're interested in getting business back, I'd suggest they start by actually requiring reviewers to play products extensively before reviewing. Most reviews read like half an hour of play, the rare ones read like they haven't even seen the box cover. You'd get fired for reviewing a movie after watching the first five minutes, the same should happen for game reviewers. If a guy gets the genre wrong or something, that should be the last time they ever work for a legit place.

If they'd at least handle the fundamentals of their job, people might not care so much that a lot of them are crazy ideologists.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Just joined these forums to add my two cents. Proposed the following elsewhere, but figured I'd do it here as well:

"I'd also like to see them donate money towards the formation of a consumer watchdog/advocate group to keep the gaming press in check and running an advertising/public education campaign to improve the public image of gamers that they helped tarnish and encourage women, minorities, and members of the LGBT community to enter the industry."

At the risk of sounding like propping up my ego, I think that this is one of the most important demands that we can make. I've been playing video games for 25 years and if there's one thing I know, it's that the mainstream media has enjoyed using gamers as scapegoats for all the evils in the world. We need some kind of agency with teeth to promote the interests of gamers and combat stereotypes and the deliberate, malicious spread of misinformation. Unless we have such an organization, this whole mess will just happen all over again in a few years.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Edit: After reading one of Brad's latest tweets and really re-reading the article, it was wrong of my to try and describe the list of five points as a list of 'demands' and that the original intention was a lot more similar to my suggestion at the end of my original post: namely, five guidelines to keep in good graces with your readerbase. Despite my desire to 'de-escalate', I was quick to describe things in more combative terms and I apologize for my mistake. To be more constructive, here's a list of five things I'd like to see come out of all of this:

1) Full disclosure of financial and personal ties within the industry - both with those who make games and those who write about them. This is basically Brad's first point, but taken a little further due to the leak of the GameJournoPros mailing list. That's not to condemn all of those among the 150+ members of the list of colluding with each other, but the fact that there's a common forum where one writer may influence others rubs me the wrong way, especially given all the articles that were posted on August 28th. Keep socializing to twitter, tumblr or whatever and let us know when you're writing about or taking a story from one of your friends in the industry.

2) Avoid censoring or culling opposing views on a topic, or encouraging such. You don't convince people you're in the right or create a positive and inclusive environment by silencing viewpoints you disagree with - no matter how strongly justified you feel about it. If a person isn't simply trolling and provides reasonable evidence of his or her concerns, that person reserves the right to be challenged on that position as well as defend it.

3) A source should always come from a reliable authority, and that source should always be cited directly. No more daisy-chaining articles from other news sites. If there's a press release, you post the e-mail or webpage. If it's an exclusive, you post the original site. If there is a credible threat, you go to the proper authorities and post their statement on the matter - the FBI and police have liaisons for a reason, use them. If it's a legal issue, wait until the case is decided before you start releasing the facts. That way, you're not ruining the reputations of innocent people. Posts on twitter and tumblr aren't evidence of anything outside of a specific individual saying something. No more hearsay.

4) Keep editorials and news separate. Pretty much as it says. We don't need personal commentary fused with new reporting - if we want your opinion, we know where to find it.

5) Avoid needless vitriol and generalizations on editorials. Never shy away from disagreement, but never take things too far away from their proper context. If an individual or individuals say something you disagree with, say you disagree with THEM (as well as link to those posts so other people can view the context) and avoid guilt-by-association. Avoid terms like 'neckbeard', 'basement-dweller', 'misogynerd' or similar phrases - you're better than that.

Hopefully this is a better and more constructive effort than the original post.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'll be honest: I don't really care about the "corruption" angle that much. To me, that's all just gossip and "dirty laundry" (of which we all have some).

My only concern is the total destruction of feminism, SJ ideology, and any other victimhood-centered philosophy. In my mind, the battle lines are clear: On one side is individualism and on the other side is collectivism. SJWs are collectivists, through and through. They want to control what people say, what they think, what they create. That mindset needs to be annihilated once and for all.

I don't need a 5 point, just that 1 all-important point.

Successfully updated karma reason!

My $.02 on this, as a pro-GG but also as somebody who'd rather this end with a quick positive resolution instead of trolling, separation into echo-chambers, and censoring of ideas. Gaming should be an escape not a debate, right?

#1. Separation of the two main arguments, those being the feminism arguments, and ethics in journalism. They are only related by circumstance. Arguing somebody over a point they don't care about and vice-versa isn't productive.

#2. Re-commitment from the offending games journalists to act like impartial journalists. Disclose your relationships (better yet don't review a game you invested in or that your buddy made), stick social issues in the editorial section of your site (if you give a game a bad score because you are sensitive to specific tropes, you either shouldn't be the one to review that game, or you should stick your objections to a sidebar. Make biases transparent. Don't let AAA publishers bully you to give their games positive press. Developers and publishers need you too, and if you make threats from them public gamers will stick up for you.

#3. For the so-called "social justice" side: have a harassment free (but not comment free) forum to discuss the issues that you care about. A tip: treating respected people from the academic world like Christina H. Sommers who have a differing opinion with harassment isn't helping our perception of you. Much like how your perception of us is shaped by trolls and harassment. Find positive ways to help promote diversity in the ranks of games developers, and promote positive games instead of attacking other games/gamers.

#4. Gamers, we have the all-mighty power of the consumer. Decide what is important to you and don't purchase games that run counter to that. Don't give media clicks if you don't agree with something they do. What's important to you shouldn't be challenged, or shamed, or even debated. It's your money and time at the end of the day.

#5. Everybody: debate like adults, acknowledge other opinions, state your points without aggression, don't make generalizations (especially the lazy ones), and realize we are all human beings here . (edit; also debate for a purpose that isn't adversarial. The point isn't to "win" over your opponent. There are no K/D ratios in debates)

Successfully updated karma reason!

I started a post here like four times and then stopped and thought about whether i really wanted to or not. Given that apparently people who are too vocally pro #gamergate have recently been doxxed and slandered to their places of employment and families it seems a bit of a sketchy proposition to chime in some times but I'm like you in that I would have laughed up my sleeve a bit at other peoples relationship drama and moved on to the next big internet brouhaha except for those aug 28th articles.

As far as condensing the movement's goals, I can probably boil it down to a whole 2 points that would make the vast majority of the movement dissipate overnight if they occured. At the very least most of the people who can make the thing seem at all sympathetic would likely be satisfied.

1. The authors and editors and devs who wrote the articles, published them and then engaged in a shitty twitter flame war with a group of people who amount to "their customers" are reprimanded by whomever signs their paychecks and issue public apologies, or lose their jobs. It is a testament to how mind bogglingly out of touch this industry is that anyone thinks they can attack their customers publicly like that and maintain employment. Any other industry, any other job you have a meltdown like that at the people who funnel money to your business and you're out on your ass. If they keep drawing paychecks at the end of this without a reprimand and apology issued there is truly no accountability at all in the industry and their sites can get used to being distrusted and hated.

2. Adopt these rules for their criticism: http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/rogers-little-rule-book the man knew what he was about, playing critic to other people's projects you're vested in via patreon or some other fundraising platform just adds a veneer of sleaziness to the whole thing.

2a. Can we stop hearing about how poor and penniless groups of people living in cities where the median rent is somewhere around 3500 dollars a month are? Because I know a ton of people who live decently off about a third of that. You're journalists covering one of the more technologically savvy industries in the world. Move and telecommute, or at the very least stop fishing for sympathy from a group that undoubtedly is full of people making way way less money than you.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Very thoughtful post once again, thanks for continuing to present a level headed discussion. Please consider joining the discussion TotalBiscuit is attempting to organise on this topic, having a rational developer well versed in the industry with prior experience with shitstorms in the discussion would be very valuable.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I don't entirely understand why you injected so much about the false allegation stuff towards you in section 2. Seems to detract from the post overall.

Honestly, I wish this whole thing would die in a fire already. It started ugly and continued on that path. Incredibly frustrating because the wheat is rarely being separated from the chaff and it all looks like a gigantic mess.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I really miss Total Annihilation...

And if you don't want comments on reviews, give us (The gamers reading it) a vote to like or dislike a review and post those results at the top of the article.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Reading this makes me glad I don't do social media.

Not that I understand remotely what all this fuss is about, nor do I care.

My soapbox is simply that social media is ruining our society and we would be better off without it. Join me, drop your twitter, drop your face book, drop your whatever the hell it is, and just live your life away from the constant updates and glare of your electronic substitutes for what living is supposed to be.

Successfully updated karma reason!

"They (gaming media) are outraged at what they see as collusion in the gaming media openly attacking gamers as a bunch of “nerds” “gamers are dead” “basement dwellers”, etc."

Yeah, and I'd also like to add to the many dismissive and insulting labels: "conspiracy theorist". Whether this specific label is accurate or not depending on the context, this term gets thrown around these days SO often just to try to silence or embarrass someone who's calling out another person or group, regardless of how accurate the accusations may be (and recently, the accusations have been hitting very close to home apparently).

This one is really disconcerting to me lately, specifically being used as a shaming tactic by the gaming media and those who drink all its kool-aid. The frequency and ease that this label gets thrown about is what makes it so dangerous -- it's not just used to make fun at those who talk about aliens, JFK's assassination, or even 9/11 debates anymore. Now the "conspiracy theorist" label is used to silence anyone who ever calls BS on anything , which is a *very* popular trend I've only really noticed in the past 2-3 years (I've never heard it used whatsoever before 2008 or 2009).

It's also used as ammunition especially often to shout down others who ever mention freedom of speech, or shouting down those defending any US constitutional issues for that matter... which is extremely disturbing, and strangely ironic.

Quoting uberlicker,

reply 16

AMEN. This is a HUGE part of the problem with not only "Gamergate", but society in general as you correctly point out. While some have the common sense to use social media and filter out the drama/BS and only use it in meaningful and positive way, most people I see who use social media often (or constantly) are literally wasting away and developing bouts of depression and/or anger management issues.

While there is obviously more to Gamergate than social media exclusively, this point cannot be ignored. Social media feeds (and poisons) people's egos in a unique, and very disturbing way; it has officially become a sickness of epidemic proportions.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting bmardiney,

reply 10

Stopped breathing there for a second as I was so surprised to see someone other than Myfist0 or Psychoak say what I think so directly.

I totally agree! There must be an end to all these weaklingphilosophies.

I know it may not help but I really feel like going to twitter and calling one of the leading feminists/SJW a fat cow.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Don't compare SJW's to cows, cows are delicious.

I want a hamburger.

Successfully updated karma reason!

One thing i can agree with is that BOTH sides are fanning the flames, and are feeding off one another. Despite pleas from the GG community not to do this. The Anti-GG community are doing a good enough job of putting their own feet in their mouths. Yet there are a few idiots that want to give the trolls ammunition that can be taken out of context. I suppose we should have expected that to happen (it still doesnt make it right).

This is turning more into an argument over freedom, and artistic expression. The freedom to chose what we want to play. With whom we want to play it with. Then to support developers that wont "hold back" on expressing their art. I am sure there are many that do hold back for fear of the "backlash". Then for game journalist to judge by the games merits instead of pushing their own agendas.

The anti GG community seems very content with "You do it just how WE say... Or Else!". The majority of the post i see my reaction is "you cant possibly be serious".

Not very many people like being "told" what to do, and some are so set in their ways that anyone who has an opposing point of view "must be crushed" in their minds.

This topic is just a small part of the bigger picture of what is wrong in our society today. Which IS the divisive Politics, and Political Correctness being crammed down our throats. People being told "what to do", "what to say", "what not to say", and "what to believe", and anyone who opposes this is ridiculed, humiliated, threatened, and harassed.

What happened to "we agree to disagree"? What happened to compromise? All sides have become so "rigid" that quite literally the only acceptable outcome is the annihilation of the other.

As i said this is not just in gaming... Its everywhere, and in everything now.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Major Stress,

reply 20

What happened to "we agree to disagree"? What happened to compromise? All sides have become so "rigid" that quite literally the only acceptable outcome is the annihilation of the other.

What I think some gamers don't quite understand is that this is merely a small battle in a war that's been raging for over 200 years. When people talk about cultural Marxism, they aren't just using Karl Marx's name for the hell of it. These same concepts of using victims and underclasses as fodder to shut down thought, discussion, and free trade have been in use for a long long time. It was only a matter of time before it hit gaming, as it hits all things good and rational, given time.

I know gamers want to keep #gamergate apolitical, but it's not, and trying to put blinders on to that fact is a good way for them to lose this battle. This is a battle for liberty of thought, liberty of speech and liberty of creative enterprise. They're playing for keeps. There is no "agree to disagree" because they are destroyers. Genghis Khan didn't have a "live and let live" attitude. If you were in his way, you died.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I view this as just another example of how reasonable, intelligent folks are too optimistic about the human race. The internet was touted as the great equalizer. People of all walks of life would be on equal footing and share knowledge and debate rationally.

Well, it quickly turned into a troll fest. Anyone remember when their were few moderators in chat rooms (before forums)? It was a nightmare of insults, racial and religious attacks, homophobic slurs, you name it. At least with forums, people have a chance to think twice before posting and there are mods to handle the worst of it.

New social media has no such thing. We are back to stream of conscious postings. There were even studies saying 1-10 people admit to trolling intentionally on a regular basis. It has become lord of the flies, except there is no real punishment for doing it. It is my opinion that the lack of having someone in your face helps give a sense of entitlement to the trolls. Ban their account? Please, they will just make another. I am not own who promotes violence, but I was raised that if you inflamed someone (calling them fat, ugly, idiot, etc.) and kept it up and they flattened you, you deserved it. Also, others would thing you are a jerk and abandon you. Social media and the internet take away any fear of reprisal other than bans or flame wars, which the trolls seem to invite.

To me, this an example of where politics is going. Each side fires up their base for a holy war, then in the general election they point fingers at the other side and say the others are worse. Like that is something I am supposed to be excited about? "I am less of an inflaming jerk than the other guy!" This is a platform?

So, like politics and this GG flame war, only the extremes are being heard because reasonable debate was thrown out the window. The new "silent majority" of rational people are giving up and walking away from it as neither side will listen to them.

Unfortunately, that leaves the floor to the extremes and the insanity rages on.

The real question is, how do we fix this mess?

I agree in principle with what making the objectives are, but if the two extremes are the only ones left in the debate, not much will fix it. Well, until they get tired of it and find a new troll topic.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The truly unfortunate thing is that while social media can have positives it also happens to bolster the worst qualities humans possess.

Feeling bad today for any reason? Tear someone/something else down online and you'll instantly feel just that little bit better!

Feeling wronged by situation/person? Easy, take to social media to begin your own campaign of wrongs to right things again!

Feeling alone and self-esteem deprived? No problem, as soon as your online musings get 'up-voted', 'liked', 'karma'd' you'll feel better.....I promise!

There just isn't anyplace to hide these days........from the ultimate ego-stroking tool. Truth doesn't even matter anymore and has long since been trumped by popularity.

Successfully updated karma reason!

^^ Why I've never had a Twitter or Facebook account.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It is always easier to tear down fences rather than try to mend them, but mending gets you a lot more sympathy from your neighbour. Or as the Dalai Lama tweeted earlier today:

"The idea of one side suffering defeat while the other side triumphs is out of date. Instead we have to develop dialogue."

Successfully updated karma reason!

The Forums Are Now Closed!

The content will remain as a historical reference, thank you.

#Gamergate Escalates

Frogboy

Part 1: The participants

Part 2: The Escalation

Part 3: Both sides are recklessly escalating it

Part 4: It’s going to get worse

Part 5: GamerGate: What is it you want? Define it soon or it will get defined for you